Oh god, Orange man creates his own social media....

Page 8 of 15 [ 232 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 15  Next

Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,028
Location: Aux Arcs

22 Oct 2021, 7:01 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
Sparta would be much preferable to Trump. At least the Spartans has class….

They would have torn Trump to shreds barehanded.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,317
Location: Northern California

22 Oct 2021, 7:10 pm

Brictoria wrote:
... it isn't that high on my "to do" list.


No worries, I can completely relate.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,945
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

22 Oct 2021, 7:23 pm

Maybe the orange guy will help Brandon identify some Chinese companies and money launderers to go after? :D


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,266
Location: Seattle-ish

22 Oct 2021, 7:23 pm

Apparently, the SPAC associated with this is going nuts, the Wall Street Bets people are onto it, and pushed it from $10/share to over $150/share, who knows where it's going to end up. Kinda makes me wish I'd been paying attention to the money side, 15X return in one day would be pretty nice.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,317
Location: Northern California

22 Oct 2021, 7:31 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Apparently, the SPAC associated with this is going nuts, the Wall Street Bets people are onto it, and pushed it from $10/share to over $150/share, who knows where it's going to end up. Kinda makes me wish I'd been paying attention to the money side, 15X return in one day would be pretty nice.


The financial market gambling opportunities we miss, eh?

Boy have there been a lot in my lifetime.

Of course, none of that money goes into the hands of the company. Wonder how well set it actually is ...


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,419
Location: Melbourne, Australia

23 Oct 2021, 3:02 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
... it isn't that high on my "to do" list.


No worries, I can completely relate.


Off Topic
I'm curious, considering your recent outcry about unlabelled satire and demands that it must be labelled, why you ignored the portion of my comment about links to satirical sites being hidden and presented as though the site is a legitimate information source: You were very vocal on this issue previously.


_________________
Quote:
"We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it." - Hillary Clinton

Quote:
"Sometimes I think that this is an era when sanity has become controversial." - Thomas Sowell


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,317
Location: Northern California

23 Oct 2021, 3:23 am

Brictoria wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
... it isn't that high on my "to do" list.


No worries, I can completely relate.


Off Topic
I'm curious, considering your recent outcry about unlabelled satire and demands that it must be labelled, why you ignored the portion of my comment about links to satirical sites being hidden and presented as though the site is a legitimate information source: You were very vocal on this issue previously.


I missed that.

I tend to skim and only read in full a fraction of posts. That does make me a bit of a bad conversationalist, doesn’t it? I’m sorry.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 53,153
Location: Over there

23 Oct 2021, 5:49 am

 ! Cornflake wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
Off Topic
I'm curious, considering your recent outcry about unlabelled satire and demands that it must be labelled, why you ignored the portion of my comment about links to satirical sites being hidden and presented as though the site is a legitimate information source: You were very vocal on this issue previously.
As I already explained to you in a recent PM:
Quote:
Since the linked site self-describes as humorous there is nothing to resolve.
Furthermore, we're not going to go down a bottomless rabbit-hole checking links for unlabelled satirical content and down through more sites that may be linked - which in turn may contain links to more sites ... ad infinitum.

The intention of labelling satire is to make that clear in those cases where posted content is presented in a way that it could conceivably be read as factual. Considering WP's target audience, it's simply safer to avoid doubt by stating that it is satirical and not to be taken seriously.
This doesn't mean that any and every single piece of humorous content must be labelled.
The aspect you seem to be (intentionally? (to use one of your own mechanisms)) missing is that this concerns the labelling of posted content that is presented in a way that it could conceivably be read as factual. That is, visible and immediately readable CONTENT posted to a thread, not links and especially not links where the satirical or humorous nature is already made clear on the linked site.

Brictoria wrote:
I didn't bother with fnord's claims, as I have difficulty in accepting the quotes as being honest, given the link to a satirical website concealed in his signature and presented as being an "official" source for legitimate information...
Had you bothered you would have seen that items presented on the "List of Atrocities" are all sourced; I wouldn't have expected anything less from Fnord. However the "official" part seems unfounded as the site makes no such claim, so I've asked Fnord to remove that from his signature.


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,419
Location: Melbourne, Australia

23 Oct 2021, 6:17 am

Cornflake wrote:
<removed PRIVATE MESSAGE>


It's nice to see privacy rules on the site permit the publication of private communication without consent of one of the parties involved - I do not recall granting any approval for you to quote any portion of text from a Private Message.

In fact, it leads me to wonder what other private information has been published (either in this way, or through PM's to others), and what other portions of the sites privacy policy you have breached:
Quote:
WrongPlanet.net has a private messaging feature. Messages passed between users should not be
read by anyone other than the sender and the recipient.

Source: https://wrongplanet.net/terms-of-use/

If a Site Admin feels free to breach the site rules so blatantly, what sort of example does this set for everyone else? Makes such rules meaningless if those who are supposed to enforce them feel so free to ignore them when it is "convenient" to themselves.

At this point, I'd hope this sort of rule breaching is solely restricted to yourself - it will have a VERY long-lasting bearing on any future interactions.


_________________
Quote:
"We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it." - Hillary Clinton

Quote:
"Sometimes I think that this is an era when sanity has become controversial." - Thomas Sowell


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,570
Location: Poland

23 Oct 2021, 6:38 am

Repeating one's own words that do not include any confidential information is not a privacy breach.

You seem bent to ignore the spirit of the rules (i.e. the purpose they're created to serve) for your own interpretation of the letter of them.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.


Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 53,153
Location: Over there

23 Oct 2021, 6:39 am

Brictoria wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
<removed PRIVATE MESSAGE>

It's nice to see privacy rules on the site permit the publication of private communication without consent of one of the parties involved - I do not recall granting any approval for you to quote any portion of text from a Private Message.
As the owner and publisher of the quoted section of the PM I decide which parts to publish, not you. If I'd not been honest in indicating that I'd already explained this to you in a PM your objection would be even more meaningless than it already is. Furthermore it is of a general interest to others and no confidences were breached.
The situation would be entirely different if I'd quoted part of a PM from you.

Quote:
In fact, it leads me to wonder what other private information has been published (either in this way, or through PM's to others), and what other portions of the sites privacy policy you have breached:
Quote:
WrongPlanet.net has a private messaging feature. Messages passed between users should not be
read by anyone other than the sender and the recipient.

Source: https://wrongplanet.net/terms-of-use/

If a Site Admin feels free to breach the site rules so blatantly, what sort of example does this set for everyone else? Makes such rules meaningless if those who are supposed to enforce them feel so free to ignore them when it is "convenient" to themselves.

At this point, I'd hope this sort of rule breaching is solely restricted to yourself - it will have a VERY long-lasting bearing on any future interactions.
"should not"
Your thinly-veiled threats and calculated, denigrating attacks are tiresome and I'm not going to tolerate any more. Further instances of this sneering condescension, to anyone on WP, will result in your account being temporarily suspended.

Now, would you like to address what you ignored and removed or is this as good as it gets?


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,419
Location: Melbourne, Australia

23 Oct 2021, 6:48 am

magz wrote:
Repeating one's own words that do not include any confidential information is not a privacy breach.

You seem bent to ignore the spirit of the rules for the letter of them.

What is bending rules in quoting:
Quote:
WrongPlanet.net has a private messaging feature. Messages passed between users should not be read by anyone other than the sender and the recipient.


The Terms of use EXPLICITLY STATE that such messages "should not be read by anyone other than the sender and the recipient", and provide nothing to differentiate between "confidential" or "non confidential" information.

If he desires to publish his own words, that would be one thing, but by including ANY text from a "Private Message" that was authored by another, that would appear to be in breach of this.

The rules are there to be followed as written, not selectively bent because the person doing so feels it "is in the spirit" of them (or are you stating that members may bend the rules if they feel it "is in the spirit" of what is written?). I'm curious how many people on the Autism Spectrum would even consider that the rules are not there to be followed, but instead can be ignored for some "in the spirit" reason?


_________________
Quote:
"We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it." - Hillary Clinton

Quote:
"Sometimes I think that this is an era when sanity has become controversial." - Thomas Sowell


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,570
Location: Poland

23 Oct 2021, 7:06 am

Brictoria wrote:
If he desires to publish his own words, that would be one thing, but by including ANY text from a "Private Message" that was authored by another, that would appear to be in breach of this.

This was exactly the case - he published his own words.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,419
Location: Melbourne, Australia

23 Oct 2021, 7:15 am

magz wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
If he desires to publish his own words, that would be one thing, but by including ANY text from a "Private Message" that was authored by another, that would appear to be in breach of this.

This was exactly the case - he published his own words.

My point is that he didn't post ONLY his own words - Had he simply posted only his own words, I wouldn't have cared... It's when another person's words, sent privately in the expectation\understanding that they will not be posted publicly, are posted as occurred here that is the source of the problem.

How far can a person trust the Private Message system (or a person they send the message to) with their private concerns\queries, if they don't know if\when the other party will decide that they will publish the message (in part or in whole)?


_________________
Quote:
"We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it." - Hillary Clinton

Quote:
"Sometimes I think that this is an era when sanity has become controversial." - Thomas Sowell


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,570
Location: Poland

23 Oct 2021, 7:23 am

Brictoria wrote:
My point is that he didn't post ONLY his own words - Had he simply posted only his own words, I wouldn't have cared... It's when another person's words, sent privately in the expectation\understanding that they will not be posted publicly, are posted as occurred here that is the source of the problem.
But this did not happen.
There are no words from other users in the quoted message. Also, no reference to anything that hasn't been discussed in public.

So, what's your point?


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.


badRobot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 824

23 Oct 2021, 8:43 am

magz wrote:
Repeating one's own words that do not include any confidential information is not a privacy breach.

Yes, it is. The fact that this conversation had place and it's subject are confidential information.

Imagine your gynecologist saying to you "as I've already explained to you, fugal infection of the vagina or vulva may cause severe itching, burning, soreness, irritation, and a whitish or whitish-gray cottage cheese-like discharge." in front of your family and friends. He is repeating his own words, and these words do not contain any confidential information about you specifically. But this is the same type of privacy breach.